Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

CCE, Delhi Versus M/s. Goldy Engineering Works, M/s. Aay Kay Engg. Works

2016 (10) TMI 868 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Clandestine removal of goods - clubbing of clearances for SSI exemption - moulds for footwear - Held that: - the turnovers for the year 2004-05 and 2005-06, as recorded by the Original Authority, were mainly based on the assumptions and presumptions and theoretical calculation of average production/value of clearances. Accordingly, without giving weightage to the presumptive calculation, the aggregate value of clearances of these two respondents were found to be below SSI limit of ₹ 1 cror .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o of the finished goods are not sustainable - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal No. 851 and 852 of 2009-EX(DB) - Final Order No. 53818-53819/2016 - Dated:- 27-9-2016 - Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Yogesh Agarwal, DR for the appellant/Department Shri Abhash Mishra, Advocate for the respondents ORDER Per B. Ravichandran These two appeals are by the Revenue against the order dated 31.12.2008 passed by the Commissioner ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

roper central excise duty. The turnover of both the respondents were sought to be combined as they belonged to same person. The duty liability was sought to be determined accordingly for the purpose of Notification No.8/2003-CE dated 1.4.2003. After adjudication, the Original Authority held that both the respondents are to be treated together for arriving at the exemption limit in terms of Notification No.8/2003-CE. The duty demand made in the show cause notice was confirmed. Further, cash recov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iate the statement of CNC Machine Operator regarding continuous operation of the CNC machines, further all the machines are installed in the premises of M/s. Goldy Engg.Works and only some manual processing is done in M/s.A.K. Engg. Works. It was further submitted that the first Appellate Authority did not appreciate the statement of different buyers of moulds, which indicated that the aforesaid goods were all from M/s. Goldy Engg. Works only. The two respondent firms, though shown as belonged t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erence in the orders of first Appellate Authority. He also submitted a compilation of case laws in his support. 5. Heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. 6. We have noticed that in the appeals filed by the Revenue, there are certain verbatim repetition of the observations of the Original Authority (for instance para-5 of the Grounds of Appeal). Examining the merits of the appeal, we have perused the impugned order carefully. 7. The case against the respondent is for clandestine re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ambay Etching Centre and four challan books recovered from M/s. Goldy Engg. Works. We have perused the findings in the impugned order on this issue. After examination of all the evidences, the first Appellate Authority found that the payment of ₹ 13,59,394/- from September, 2004 to Jan. 2006 as job work charges has not been supported with any evidence. It was concluded that in the absence of any evidence, it cannot be said with certainty that the said payments were made by the respondent t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egorically held that the Department is not sure about the quantity, description, nature and price of goods alleged to have been manufactured by the respondent during the period from September, 2004 to Jan. 2006. However, the Revenue went ahead and calculated the duty liability without any basic fact. The first Appellate Authority also did not admit the authenticity of the note book recovered from the job worker premises. The author of entries in the note book is not known and was not investigate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version